does anybody from here consider jodi as the best net art website???
im in love of this

another parts of the site i found or website from the same authour

and this is a critic that jodi is making about blogs:[URL=“”]

um, i opened the first 3 links. there’s alot of ugly going on there.

I really like this, but I really like that 80’s computer graphic style anyway (is there a name for it), I would say this is an acquired taste, I can imagine lots of people hating on this.

:smiley: this just brings back so many memories of my youth.

yea, these peeps aren’t winning any awards.

awards matters?
if you look for jodi influence on net art, you would we surprise, im sure of that.
jodi is for me the most important net art artist in history

i was generalizing my opinion on the bad art on that site. you have your opinion and i have mine. i just don’t agree that a bunch of sites with mediocre graphics or reused historical graphics are going to place a mark on art history. some of this crap even has bad resolution and websave quality.

“most important” - yea, these crap graphics are way more important than anything people like joshua davis ( or james patterson ( have done for digital graphics or flash. psh…

there are tons of better artists on the net and in the real world.

you know i’ve been refraining from moving most of the bad sites being posted in kool sites… but this one takes the cake… it’s unrivaled in absolute atrocity.

the problem here is that we are used to be on sites with cool and smooth graphics. where everything has to be cute and nice, nice tipography, nice colors, nice interface. and jodi is laughing about all that. this artist creates net art based con concepts and idea, not colors or imterfaces.
i respect all designers who works with interfaces, but i rather, designers that work on concepts, ideas, abstraction, and show another face of web. they work as “artist”, just like artist from the 60/70/80 or 90s (like happenings, performancem, abstract, minimal, povera, situasionism art). and they are showing, that graphic and web design can be considered as an art under the idea of “net art”.
i really cant belive what they do with this post. just because someone take it out from “kool sites” coss they dont consider it cool. does flash make it cool? smooth graphics make it cool?. im really disapointed.


A website isn’t kool because of how deep it may be or symbolic. It’s about initial impression.

I’ll give you this, when someone visits a certain site… they’ve got two choices, leave or stay. After browsing the content, they also have the ability to leave forever.

They don’t just think, “I’m never visiting this site again.” There’s a pyschological aspect to content delivery that draws people away from such sites. The mere lack of usablity and the fact that I couldn’t even see the whole page on my monitor… far from tell what it is, made me leave on instant. I went back to see what you were talking about, still didn’t see it… I left.

edit:/ I understand the artist’s way of thinking… however if you don’t present it in a pleasing fashion, no one wants to see it. Regardless of how meaningful it is. As much as I like the structure of a hydrogen bomb…